KU Leuven and Play the Game take a fresh look at international federations

In a move to assess recent developments in international sports governance, Play the Game and KU Leuven follow up on the findings produced by the 2015 Sports Governance Observer.

Serious flaws in international sports governance were revealed when in 2015, Play the Game published the Sports Governance Observer (SGO), an in-depth study of 35 international sports federations, assessing the state of good governance.

The report, authored by Dr Arnout Geeraert from KU Leuven, produced and used a benchmarking tool that was used to estimate the degree of good governance in the federations. Overall, the report indicated that two in three of the federations were in need of fundamental reform, because they could not even meet half of the very basic governance criteria

Now, nearly three years later, Play the Game, in collaboration with Dr Geeraert and KU Leuven, has decided to follow up on the results yielded by the SGO report to find out if things have changed.

“Apart from high-profile cases like FIFA and the IAAF there is little evidence showing if the explicit demands for better governance from the outside and inside of sport have made any convincing impact. We hope that once again our research will give a very clear picture of the state of affairs” international director of Play the Game, Jens Sejer Andersen, says.

The collaboration will also include a governance benchmarking of five selected international sports federations: FIFA, the IAAF, the International Tennis Federation (ITF), the International Handball Federation (IHF) and the International Swimming Federation (FINA).

But not only the sports organisations themselves need an overhaul, also the instruments used to measure the state of governance will be checked up on.

“Our notions of good governance are constantly evolving, and therefore our instruments for measuring good governance should also evolve,” says Dr. Geeraert about the decision to follow up on the 2015 SGO report.

“Through the experience gained from working on good governance in national federations and studying recent reforms in international federations, we have improved our understanding of what constitutes good governance and how we can measure it.

“In addition, we have seen some positive reforms in international federations and there is a need for nuanced assessment of these reforms. Assessing these reforms requires a state-of-the-art tool that allows us to highlight positive changes and put our finger on deficits that still need to be addressed,” Geeraert says.

Only partly comparablePlay the Game recently signed an agreement with Dr Geeraert and KU Leuven to produce a report containing a revised version of the SGO benchmarking tool including a method for combining governance scores, i.e. scores on transparency, democracy, checks and balances, and solidarity, into a single index indicating the level of good governance within a federation.

While the revised version of the SGO will build on the 2015 tool, Geeraert does not expect the results of the new review to be completely comparable with the 2015 review.

“We value progress over comparability. We think it is more important to update our instrument so that it is able to assess reforms. That implies that it will be difficult to compare scores from the new assessment with those from the previous (i.e. SGO 2015) one. However, it is still possible to compare data of specific indicators," Geeraert explains.

Although the Sports Governance Observer does not measure the real behaviour of the international federations, but only the formal measures and structures in place, it should not be dismissed as a useless academic exercise, Andersen explains.

“Having the right rules and procedures in place does not safeguard international sport from corruption and mismanagement. Culture must also change. But those who wish to create lasting change from the inside, must be supported by healthy standards for how the organisations are run,” he says.

Guidelines for postingPlay the Game promotes an open debate on sport and sports politics and we strongly encourage everyone to participate in the discussions on playthegame.org. But please follow these simple guidelines when you write a post:

Please be respectful - even if you disagree strongly with certain viewpoints. Slanderous or profane remarks will not be posted.

Please keep to the subject. Spam or solicitations of any kind will not be posted.

Background: The Sports Governance Observer

Authored by Dr Geeraert, in collaboration with Play the Game, the Sports Governance Observer employs a governance tool developed in cooperation with experts from six European Universities to measure governance standards in four dimensions including: transparency, democratic process, checks and balances, and solidarity.

The report found that a majority of the sports federations had no term limits on elected officials, no public information on accounts and activities, no integrity checks of their leaders, no insight into salaries and no effective internal control mechanisms such as independent ethics and audit committees.

Key findings in the report include, but are not limited to:

Only four federations (11%) had a nominations committee in place that performs integrity and professional checks.

A minority of 12 federations (35%) published externally audited annual financial reports on its website.

None of the federations published reports on remuneration, including per diem payments and bonuses, of its board members and senior officials.

A minority of six (17%) federations had clear conflict of interest rules. Seven (20%) federations did not have any conflict of interest rules in place.

12 federations (34%) did not have an ethics committee in place

In 23 federations (66%), elections took place according to clear and objective procedures using secret ballots.

Only 11 federations (31%) had some form of limitation of terms for elected leaders in place.

Use of cookies

The website www.playthegame.org uses cookies to provide a user-friendly and relevant website. Cookies provide information about how the website is being used or support special functions such as Twitter feeds.

By continuing to use this site, you consent to the use of cookies. You can find out more about our use of cookies and personal data in our privacy policy.